Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting, Dublin Core and Accessibility in the Oaister Repository

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting, Dublin Core and Accessibility in the Oaister Repository University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln Winter 12-30-2012 Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting, Dublin Core and Accessibility in the OAIster Repository Michael Peake San Jose State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac Part of the Library and Information Science Commons Peake, Michael, "Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting, Dublin Core and Accessibility in the OAIster Repository" (2012). Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). 892. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/892 1 Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting, Dublin Core and accessibility in the OAIster repository. Michael Peake San Jose State University 2 Abstract This paper examines the use of Dublin Core as a minimum metadata standard for Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting in terms of its impact on end user experience in the OAIster repository. Specifically the study looked at the use of controlled vocabulary searches versus non-controlled vocabulary searches, as well as the impact of Dublin Core on the granularity and consistency records. Searches were performed in OAIster using Library of Congress Subject Headings and Name Authority Files, as well as non-controlled vocabulary searches for the same terms. The study concluded that controlled vocabulary searches are good for retrieving relevant results, but non-controlled vocabulary searches can retrieve more relevant results, at the cost of large numbers of non-relevant results also being returned. The openness of Dublin Core does lead to problems of granularity and consistency, but some records indicate the potential of Dublin Core for providing very useful records. The study concludes that institutions should give serious consideration to user experience and repository display before converting records to Dublin Core for harvesting. 3 Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting, Dublin Core and accessibility in the OAIster repository. Introduction The rapid increase in information resources on the World Wide Web has created a situation where an unprecedented amount of knowledge is potentially available to anyone with internet access. Indeed Tony Gill argues that “the Web is the largest and fastest-growing collection of documents the world has ever seen” (2008, p. 25). The publically indexable web alone had at least 25.21 billion pages in 2009 (“World Wide Web”, 2012, Statistics section, para. 1), and this does not include the many resources in databases that require search forms to be filled out before they are accessible (Raghavan & Garcia-Molina, n.d., abstract section). With so many information resources available the problem becomes one of successfully finding relevant resources among the billions available. Metadata, or data about data, is key to retrieving relevant information because it structures data about information resources in ways that can provide meaningful access points for searchers. For example the use of Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC) records in online public access catalogs (OPAC’s) in the library field provides searchers with understandable access points, such as subject or author, and a controlled vocabulary that aids retrieval by bringing together resources on the same topic or by the same author. Although OPAC’s generally allow keyword searching, the combination of access points and controlled vocabulary can greatly aid retrieval of relevant resources as they bring together like resources that may be described differently and thus not show up in a keyword search. Works by an author who writes under more than one name, for example Stephen King/Richard Bachman, or subjects that may be 4 named differently within the literature, for example the Spanish Civil War/Spanish Revolution can be retrieved together in this way. Paradoxically metadata is both a key and a hindrance to finding relevant information. Different knowledge communities work with different metadata schemas and standards that are best suited to their purposes and priorities. For example the “archival community has embraced standards such as” Encoded Archival Description (EAD) and Describing Archives: A Content Standard (DACS) (Spiro, 2009, The Role of Software in Addressing Hidden Collections section), while the library community currently tends towards MARC and Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules 2 nd edition (AACR2). With researchers interested in a variety of resources, for example books, archival material, web documents, and images, the issue becomes one of metadata interoperability. As Woodley points out, bringing material together from a single community in a union catalog, like WorldCat for the library community, is possible because “the contributing community shares the same rules for description and access and the same protocol for encoding the information” (2008, p. 46). Bringing together data encoded in different metadata schemas and formatted according to different content standards poses issues of interoperability. In other words records from within a single knowledge community may have a high level of interoperability, but “it is when communities want to share their content in a broader arena, or reuse the information for other purposes, that problems of interoperability arise” (Woodley, 2008, p. 39). There are many approaches to improving metadata interoperability. This paper will examine one of them, namely the role that the Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH), in conjunction with Dublin Core, plays in improving the accessibility of records held by diverse institutions. The OAIster database hosted by WorldCat will be considered in terms of its ability to make records accessible. 5 Statement of the Problem There are a vast and continually growing number of information resources on the World Wide Web. Many of these resources remain hidden from commonly used search methods, such as Google or Yahoo search engines. By exposing their records to OAI compliant harvesters, institutions hope to make their records easier to access by allowing them to be retrieved from larger repositories, such as OAIster or Europeana. These repositories bring records together and allow users to search through the records of various institutions in one place. However, different institutions use different metadata schemas and data standards, so in order to ensure the interoperability of the records, OAI requires all records, at a minimum, to be exposed in simple Dublin Core. There is a concern that the use of simple Dublin Core may lead, in itself, to retrieval issues due to lack of granularity and crosswalking problems. The question arises as to whether the use of simple Dublin Core hampers the retrievability of records in OAI compliant repositories? Literature Review “The primary role of the OAI-PMH is to facilitate resource discovery when resources are stored in a number of distributed, independent repositories by exporting metadata about items in those repositories” (Fegen, 2007, What is the OAI Protocol for Metadata Harvesting for? section, para. 1). In doing this the OAI-PMH attempts to address the problem of metadata interoperability. According to the National Information Standards Organization (NISO), “interoperability is the ability of multiple systems with different hardware and software platforms, data structures, and interfaces to exchange data with minimal loss of content and functionality” (2004, p. 4). Chan and Zeng argue that metadata interoperability is needed to 6 make it “possible to facilitate the exchange and sharing of data prepared according to different metadata schemas and to enable cross-collection searching” (2006a, Introduction section, para. 1). Haslhofer and Klas consider metadata interoperability “a perquisite for uniform access to media objects in multiple autonomous and heterogeneous information systems” (2010, p. 1). With Woodley’s declaration that “global access to the universe of traditional print materials and digital resources has become more than ever the goal of many institutions” (2008, p. 38), the importance of metadata interoperability can easily be seen. Chan and Zeng identify three different levels of approach to achieving Metadata interoperability, the schema level, the record level and the repository level. They note that individual projects may combine more than one approach (2006a, Metadata Interoperability Projects at Different Levels section, para. 5). The OAI-PMH approach is focused on both the repository level and the schema level. Repositories are identified by Woodley as a means of bringing metadata records together in a single database “with links from individual records back to their home environments” (2008, p. 47). Chan and Zeng differentiate between two types of repository, those that harvest records based on converted metadata, for example using the OAI- PMH, and those that harvest records without needing record conversion (2006b, Achieving Interoperability at the Repository Level section). This research paper only considers repositories that use the OAI-PMH. Woodley describes repositories as a “recent model for union catalogs” (2008, p. 47) that physically bring together records “in a single database, with links from individual records back to their home environments” (2008, p. 47). According to the Open Archives Initiative website, two
Recommended publications
  • The Serials Crisis and Open Access: a White Paper for the Virginia Tech Commission on Research
    The Serials Crisis and Open Access A White Paper for the Virginia Tech Commission on Research Philip Young University Libraries Virginia Tech December 2, 2009 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. 1 Introduction This white paper offers an introduction to open access as well as a look at its current development. The open access movement is an attempt to free scholarly communication from restrictions on access, control, and cost, and to enable benefits such as data mining and increased citations. Open access has gained significant momentum through mandates from research funders and universities. While open access can be provided in parallel with traditional publishing, it is increasingly available as a publishing option. While open access is approached here from the problem of subscription inflation, it is important to recognize that open access is not merely a library issue, but affects the availability of research to current and future students and scholars. The Serials Crisis The phrase “serials crisis” has been in use for more than a decade as shorthand for the rise in costs for academic journals and the inability of libraries to bring these costs under control. Price inflation for academic journals significantly exceeds the consumer price index (see graph, next page). The most recent data show that journal prices increased at an average rate of 8% in 2007.1 Because journal subscriptions are a large part of the collections budget at academic libraries, any reduction in funding usually results in a loss of some journals. And the high rate of annual inflation means that academic library budgets must increase every year simply to keep the same resources that students and faculty need.
    [Show full text]
  • Making Institutional Repositories Work “Making Institutional Repositories Work Sums It up Very Well
    Making Institutional Repositories Work “Making Institutional Repositories Work sums it up very well. This book, the first of its kind, explains how IRs work and how to get the greatest re- sults from them. As many of us know, numerous IRs launched with high hopes have in fact languished with lackluster results. Faculty have little in- terest, and administrators see little promise. But the many chapter authors of this very well edited book have made their IRs successful, and here they share their techniques and successes. This is a necessary book for anyone contemplating starting an IR or looking to resurrect a moribund one.” — Richard W. Clement Dean, College of University Libraries & Learning Sciences University of New Mexico “This volume presents an interesting cross-section of approaches to in- stitutional repositories in the United States. Just about every view and its opposite makes an appearance. Readers will be able to draw their own con- clusions, depending on what they see as the primary purpose of IRs.” — Stevan Harnad Professor, University of Québec at Montréal & University of Southampton “Approaching this volume as one of ‘those of us who have been furiously working to cultivate thriving repositories,’ I am very excited about what this text represents. It is a broad compilation featuring the best and brightest writing on all the topics I’ve struggled to understand around re- positories, and it also marks a point when repository management and de- velopment is looking more and more like a core piece of research library work. Callicott, Scherer, and Wesolek have pulled together all the things I wished I’d been able to read in my first year as a scholarly communication librarian.
    [Show full text]
  • OAI-PMH: a TOOL for METADATA HARVESTING and FEDERATED SEARCH Dipen Deka
    358 PLANNER-2007 OAI-PMH: A TOOL FOR METADATA HARVESTING AND FEDERATED SEARCH Dipen Deka Abstract This paper focuses on the importance of OAI-PMH in the aspect of accessibility to the digital repositories. The basic structure of OAI-PMH and its functional elements are given along with some existing metadata harvester services of India. The paper discusses about the PKP Harvester software and its users. Concludes that OAI-PMH is an effective solution of the problem of lack of interoperability. Keywords : Digital repositories, federated search, interoperability, OAI-PMH, Metadata Harvesting 1. Introduction After the rapid growth of digitization activities the number of digital repositories of various educational, research institutions is also increasing. But no one can say that the digitization is the answer to the problem of proper access of information. The accessibility of these vast and diverse resources is a very difficult task. The lack of interoperability is one of the most significant problems that digital repositories are facing today. In general interoperability is the ability of systems, organizations and individuals to work together towards common or diverse goals. In the technical arena it is supported by open standards for communication between systems and for description of resources and collections, among others. According to Priscilla Caplan search interoperability is ‘the ability to perform a search over diverse set of metadata records and obtain meaningful results’. Interoperability is a broad term, touching many diverse aspects of archive initiatives, including their metadata formats, their underlying architecture, their openness to the creation of third-party digital library services, their integration with the established mechanism of scholarly communication, their usability in a cross-disciplinary context, their ability to contribute to a collective metrics system for usage and citation, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes from the Interoperability Front: a Progress Report on the Open Archives Initiative
    Notes from the Interoperability Front: A Progress Report on the Open Archives Initiative Herbert Van de Sompel1, Carl Lagoze2 1Research Library, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM mailto:[email protected] 2Computing and Information Science, Cornell University Ithaca, NY USA 14850 [email protected] Abstract. The Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) was first released in January 2001. Since that time, the protocol has been adopted by a broad community and become the focus of a number of research and implementation projects. We describe the various activities building on the OAI-PMH since its first release. We then describe the activities and decisions leading up to the release of a stable Version 2 of the OAI-PMH. Finally, we describe the key features of OAI-PMH Version 2. 1 Introduction Over a year has passed since the first release of the Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata harvesting (OAI-PMH) in January 2001. During that period, the OAI- PMH has emerged as a practical foundation for digital library interoperability. The OAI-PMH supports interoperability via a relatively simple two-party model. At one end, data providers employ the OAI-PMH to expose structured data, metadata, in various forms. At the other end, service providers use the OAI-PMH to harvest the metadata from data providers and then subsequently automatically process it and add value in the form of services. While resource discovery is often mentioned as the exemplar service, other service possibilities include longevity and risk management [19], personalization [16], and current awareness. The general acceptance of the OAI-PMH is based on a number of factors.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategische Und Operative Handlungsoptionen Für Wissenschaftliche Einrichtungen Zur Gestaltung Der Open-Access-Transformation
    ! ! ! !"#$"%&'()*%+,-.+/0%#$"'1%+2$-.3,-&(/0"'/-%-+ 45#+6'((%-()*$4"3')*%+7'-#')*",-&%-+8,#+ 9%("$3",-&+.%#+:0%-;<))%((;=#$-(4/#>$"'/-+ ! "#$$%&'('#)*! "#$!%$&'()#()!*+,!'-'*+./,01+(!2$'*+,! ")+')&!,-#.)$),-#(%! /"&0!,-#.01! ! +/()+$+/013! '(!*+$!41/&5,561/,01+(!7'-#&383! *+$!9#.:5&*3;<(/=+$,/383!"#!>+$&/(! ! =5(!9+/("!4'.6+&! ! ! ?/+!4$8,/*+(3/(!*+$!9#.:5&*3;<(/=+$,/383!"#!>+$&/(@!! 4$5AB!?$B;C()B!?$B!D':/(+!E#(,3! ! ?/+!?+-'(/(!*+$!41/&5,561/,01+(!7'-#&383@! 4$5AB!?$B!2':$/+&+!F+3"&+$! ! ! 2#3'013+$! %$,3)#3'013+$@!! ! 4$5AB!?$B!4+3+$!D01/$.:'01+$! GH+/3)#3'013+$@!! 4$5AB!?$B!I5&A$'.!95$,3.'((! ! ?'3#.!*+$!?/,6#3'3/5(@!JKB!F'/!LMLJ! !"#$%&'()*+),-#",'. G#,'..+(A',,#()!BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB!NC! O:,3$'03!BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB!NCC! ?'(-,')#()!BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB!NCCC! O:-P$"#(),=+$"+/01(/,!BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB!CQ! R':+&&+(=+$"+/01(/,!BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB!QCC! O::/&*#(),=+$"+/01(/,!BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB!QCCC!
    [Show full text]
  • The Scielo Brazilian Scientific Journal Gateway and Open Archives
    The SciELO Brazilian Scientific Journal Gateway and Open Archives:... http://www.dlib.org/dlib/march03/marcondes/03marcondes.html Search | Back Issues | Author Index | Title Index | Contents D-Lib Magazine March 2003 Volume 9 Number 3 ISSN 1082-9873 A Report on the Development of the SciELO-Open Archives Data Provider Server Carlos Henrique Marcondes Information Science Department, Federal Fluminense University, Brazil <[email protected]> Luís Fernando Sayão Nuclear Information Center, Nuclear Energy National Commission, Brazil <[email protected]> Abstract SciELO, the Scientific Electronic Library Online, uses a methodology developed by BIREME/PAHO/WHO [1] that enables the implementation of web digital libraries of scientific journal collections of full text articles. Various SciELO gateways are now in operation, providing access to academic journals from Brazil and other countries in Latin America and the Caribbean. SciELO plays a very important role in the worldwide dissemination of the technical and scientific literature published in developing countries, thereby increasing visibility of this literature that otherwise would be accessible only within the borders of those developing countries. The SciELO methodology utilizes ISIS software for formatting and maintaining the SciELO metadata database. UNESCO developed this software as well as other associated software, which serve as the bases for Science, Technology and Medicine (STM) information systems, databases and networks in several developing countries. This article reports on the
    [Show full text]
  • Preprints in Scholarly Communication: Re-Imagining Metrics and Infrastructures
    publications Article Preprints in Scholarly Communication: Re-Imagining Metrics and Infrastructures B. Preedip Balaji 1,* and M. Dhanamjaya 2 1 Indian Institute for Human Settlements Library and School of Library and Information Science, REVA University, Bengaluru 560064, India 2 School of Library and Information Science, REVA University, Yelahanka, Bengaluru 560064, India; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +91-080-6760-6661 Received: 2 September 2018; Accepted: 8 January 2019; Published: 14 January 2019 Abstract: Digital scholarship and electronic publishing within scholarly communities change when metrics and open infrastructures take center stage for measuring research impact. In scholarly communication, the growth of preprint repositories as a new model of scholarly publishing over the last three decades has been one of the major developments. As it unfolds, the landscape of scholarly communication is transitioning—with much being privatized as it is made open—and turning towards alternative metrics, such as social media attention, author-level, and article-level metrics. Moreover, the granularity of evaluating research impact through new metrics and social media changes the objective standards of evaluating research performance. Using preprint repositories as a case study, this article situates them in a scholarly web, examining their salient features, benefits, and futures. Moves towards scholarly web development and publishing on the semantic and social web with open infrastructures, citations, and alternative metrics—how preprints advance building the web as data—is discussed. We determine that this will viably demonstrate new metrics and, by enhancing research publishing tools in the scholarly commons, facilitate various communities of practice. However, for preprint repositories to be sustainable, scholarly communities and funding agencies should support continued investment in open knowledge, alternative metrics development, and open infrastructures in scholarly publishing.
    [Show full text]
  • Harvesting Full Text and Metadata of Opendoar Through Dspace OAI-PMH : a Framework for Institutional Digital Repositories
    International Journal of Library and Information Studies Vol.8(1) Jan-Mar, 2018 ISSN: 2231-4911 Harvesting Full text and Metadata of OpenDOAR through DSpace OAI-PMH : A Framework for Institutional Digital Repositories Dr. Sukumar Mandal Assistant Professor Department of Library and Information Science The University of Burdwan Burdwan – 713 104 Email: [email protected] Abstract - Digital resource is increasing in this modern age due to exponential growth of technological impact and its peripherals. IDRs will additionally include digital materials that subsist outside the physical and administrative bounds of any one digital library. IDRs will include all the processes and accommodations that are the backbone and nervous system of libraries. The Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) is a very high performance mechanism for client server architecture in repository interoperability. Broadly it can be classified in two ways such as data provider and service provider. Data Provider can access the structured standards global metadata by using OAI-PMH tool. On the otherhand service providers then make easily harvest the metadata through a set of six verbs of OAI-PMH based URL. Requests for data can be based on a datestamp range, and can be restricted to named sets defined by the provider. Data providers can only managed the XML based Dublin Core metadata format. It is possible to designing and developing an integrated institutional digital repository in different ways. In this research paper harvest the fulltext and metadata available in OpenDOAR by using the open source software DSpace. It is fully compatible with web-enabled OAI-PMH features.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Access Self-Archiving: an Author Study
    Open access self-archiving: An author study May 2005 Alma Swan and Sheridan Brown Key Perspectives Limited 48 Old Coach Road, Playing Place, TRURO, Cornwall, TR3 6ET, UK (Registered Office) Tel. +44 (0)1392 879702 www.keyperspectives.co.uk www.keyperspectives.com CONTENTS Executive summary 1. Introduction 1 2. The respondents 7 3. Open access journals 10 4. The use of research information 13 4.1 Ease of access to work-related information 13 4.2 Age of articles most commonly used 13 4.3 Respondents’ publishing activities 17 4.3.1 Number of articles published 17 4.3.2 Respondents’ citation records 20 4.3.3 Publishing objectives 23 4.4 Searching for information 23 4.4.1 Research articles in closed archives 24 4.4.2 Research articles in open archives 24 5. Self-archiving 26 5.1 Self-archiving experience 26 5.1.1 The level of self-archiving activity 26 5.1.2 Length of experience of self-archiving 38 5.2 Awareness of self-archiving as a means to providing open access 43 5.3 Motivation issues 49 5.4 The mechanics of self-archiving 51 5.4.1 Who has actually done the depositing? 51 5.4.2 How difficult is it to self-archive? 51 5.4.3 How long does it take to self-archive? 53 5.4.4 Preservation of archived articles 55 5.4.5 Copyright 56 5.4.6 Digital objects being deposited in open archives 57 5.4.7 Mandating self-archiving? 62 6. Discussion 69 References 74 Appendices: Appendix 1: Reasons for publishing in open access journals, by subject area (table) 77 Appendix 2: Reasons for publishing in open access journals, by subject area (verbatim responses) 79 Appendix 3: Reasons for not publishing in open access journals, by subject area (table) 83 Appendix 4: Reasons for not publishing in open access journals, by subject area (verbatim responses) 86 Appendix 5: Ease of access to research articles needed for work, by subject area 93 Appendix 6: Reasons for publishing research results (verbatim responses) 94 Appendix 7: Use of closed archives: results broken down by subject area 97 Tables 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Access and New Standards in Scientific Publishing
    Open Access and New Standards in Scientific Publishing The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery DISCLOSURE INFORMATION Ernest E. Moore, MD – Nothing to disclose. Jennifer Crebs – Nothing to disclose. How did we get here? Timeline THE BEGINNING 15th century: Gutenberg‟s press spreads across Europe. ~1620s: The „Invisible College‟ era (Robert Boyle and friends). Books published. 1660s: Founding of the Royal Society (1660) and the French Academy of Sciences (1666). January 1665: First scholarly journal (Journal des sçavans) launches. March 1965: First scientific journal, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. Scientific communication wed to print. PROGRESSION 1700s: The „Republic of Letters‟ – explosive growth and development of science. Letters written in duplicate, published (social networking, 18 th-century style) 1800s: The rise of specialties. Medical journals arrive on the scene, e.g. NEJM (1812), The Lancet (1823), JAMA (1883), Annals of Surgery (1885). Science as a profession supported by publication. MODERN ERA 1880s-1900s: Printing technology proliferates, but expensive. Publishers fill role of disseminating research. Focus on monographs. “The Watson and Crick paper 1960s: Adoption of peer review by was not peer-reviewed by some journals. Nature… the paper could not have been refereed: its 1965: The first citation index, correctness is self-evident. No practical birth of impact factor. referee working in the field could have kept his mouth 1970s: Journal articles start to adopt shut once he saw the specific format
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing Repository Types
    COMPARING REPOSITORY TYPES. Challenges and barriers for subject-based repositories, research repositories, national repository systems and institutional repositories in serving scholarly communication Chris Armbruster, Max Planck Digital Library, Max Planck Society Invalidenstrasse 35, D-10115 Berlin - www.mpdl.mpg.de Executive Director, Research Network 1989 - www.cee-socialscience.net/1989 Laurent Romary, INRIA-Gemo & Humboldt Universität zu Berlin (Institut für Deutsche Sprache und Linguistik) Dorotheenstrasse 24, D-10117 Berlin - www.linguistik.hu-berlin.de/ Abstract After two decades of repository development, some conclusions may be drawn as to which type of repository and what kind of service best supports digital scholarly communication, and thus the production of new knowledge. Four types of publication repository may be distinguished, namely the subject-based repository, research repository, national repository system and institutional repository. Two important shifts in the role of repositories may be noted. With regard to content, a well-defined and high quality corpus is essential. This implies that repository services are likely to be most successful when constructed with the user and reader uppermost in mind. With regard to service, high value to specific scholarly communities is essential. This implies that repositories are likely to be most useful to scholars when they offer dedicated services supporting the production of new knowledge. Along these lines, challenges and barriers to repository development may be identified in three key dimensions: a) identification and deposit of content; b) access and use of services; and c) preservation of content and sustainability of service. An indicative comparison of challenges and barriers in some major world regions such as Europe, North America and East Asia plus Australia is offered in conclusion.
    [Show full text]
  • Metadata for Harvesting: the Open Archives Initiative, and How to Find Things on the Web', the Electronic Library, Vol
    Citation for published version: Hunter, P & Guy, M 2004, 'Metadata for Harvesting: The Open Archives Initiative, and how to find things on the Web', The Electronic Library, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 168-174. https://doi.org/10.1108/02640470410533434 DOI: 10.1108/02640470410533434 Publication date: 2004 Document Version Peer reviewed version Link to publication http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02640470410533434 University of Bath Alternative formats If you require this document in an alternative format, please contact: [email protected] General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 02. Oct. 2021 Metadata for Harvesting: the Open Archives Initiative, and how to find things on the Web. Philip Hunter and Marieke Guy. Abstract The OAI Protocol for Metadata Harvesting offers the prospect of resource discovery tools far beyond what is currently available to users of the Web via standard search engines. This article illustrates how existing information about available resources can be repurposed fairly easily and cheaply using standard tools. However the publishing of this information throws up a number of practical and philosophical questions which have to be addressed by projects and institutions. Keywords Open Archives Initiative, Metadata, Harvesting, Resource Discovery, ePrints, Dublin Core.
    [Show full text]